Emily Elliott

The applicant appealed the Town of Fort Erie's failure to make a decision on a proposed plan of subdivision to permit townhouse dwellings.

The parties subsequently reached a full uncontested settlement on a revised Draft Plan of Vacant Land Condominium for 93 units.

Relying on the uncontested expert land use planning evidence of Emily Elliott, the Tribunal found that the revised proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, conformed to the applicable Official Plans, represented good planning, and was in the public interest.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approved the draft plan subject to conditions, and delegated the authority to clear conditions to the Town.

The applicant appealed the Town of Fort Erie's failure to make a decision on a proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision to permit townhouse dwellings.

The parties subsequently reached a full uncontested settlement on a revised Draft Plan of Vacant Land Condominium for 93 townhouse units.

Relying on the uncontested expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, in conformity with applicable Official Plans, and representative of good planning.

The appeal was allowed in part, and the Draft Plan of Condominium was approved in principle, subject to conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Brantford's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision to permit a residential community with approximately 489 units.

The parties reached a settlement and requested the Tribunal approve the planning instruments via a written hearing.

Relying on the uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed development conforms to the Provincial Planning Statement and the City's Official Plan, and represents good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part, and the Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision were approved subject to conditions.

The applicant appealed the Town's refusal of two consent applications to create two new residential lots from an existing property in the Village of Queenston.

The Tribunal heard evidence from multiple experts on land use planning, cultural heritage, transportation, and stormwater management.

The Tribunal preferred the applicant's planning evidence, finding that the proposed lots represent appropriate modest infill that conforms to the Town's Official Plan and Secondary Plan.

The Tribunal accepted uncontroverted evidence that the development would not negatively impact adjacent cultural heritage resources.

While acknowledging concerns about sight lines for the middle lot's driveway due to the road's steep grade, the Tribunal found this could be addressed through the required municipal entrance permit process.

The appeal was allowed and provisional consent granted subject to conditions.

The appellant appealed the City of Stratford's approval of Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments that would permit the development of two 3.5-storey stacked townhouse buildings comprising 30 units.

The appellant argued the development was incompatible with the low-density character of the stable residential neighbourhood.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant and the City, finding that the proposed development promotes efficient intensification of underutilized lands, utilizes existing infrastructure, and features a design sympathetic to the area's heritage character.

The appeals were dismissed and the amendments approved.